Dataset Information

External validation of prognostic scores for COVID-19: a multicenter cohort study of patients hospitalized in Greater Paris University Hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to an unparalleled influx of patients. Prognostic scores could help optimizing healthcare delivery, but most of them have not been comprehensively validated. We aim to externally validate existing prognostic scores for COVID-19.

Methods

We used "COVID-19 Evidence Alerts" (McMaster University) to retrieve high-quality prognostic scores predicting death or intensive care unit (ICU) transfer from routinely collected data. We studied their accuracy in a retrospective multicenter cohort of adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from January 2020 to April 2021 in the Greater Paris University Hospitals. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were computed for the prediction of the original outcome, 30-day in-hospital mortality and the composite of 30-day in-hospital mortality or ICU transfer.

Results

We included 14,343 consecutive patients, 2583 (18%) died and 5067 (35%) died or were transferred to the ICU. We examined 274 studies and found 32 scores meeting the inclusion criteria: 19 had a significantly lower AUC in our cohort than in previously published validation studies for the original outcome; 25 performed better to predict in-hospital mortality than the composite of in-hospital mortality or ICU transfer; 7 had an AUC > 0.75 to predict in-hospital mortality; 2 had an AUC > 0.70 to predict the composite outcome.

Conclusion

Seven prognostic scores were fairly accurate to predict death in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The 4C Mortality Score and the ABCS stand out because they performed as well in our cohort and their initial validation cohort, during the first epidemic wave and subsequent waves, and in younger and older patients.

SUBMITTER: Lombardi Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8478265 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim of this study was to evaluate the changing pattern of antibiotic usage and antimicrobial resistance of bacterial pathogens among hospitalized patients in Korea. We simultaneously investigated the correlation between antimicrobial resistance and antibiotic consumption.Data on total antibiotic prescriptions, patient days, and antimicrobial sensitivity tests among inpatients from 6 university hospitals in Korea in 2004, 2008, and 2012 were collected. The consumption of each antibiotic class was converted to defined daily dose/1000 patient-days by using the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system by the World Health Organization. We defined third-generation cephalosporins (3rd CEPs), fourth-generation cephalosporins, beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors, and fluoroquinolones (FQs) as broad-spectrum antibiotics and carbapenems, tigecycline, glycopeptides, oxazolidinone, and polymyxin as antibiotics against multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens.A 15.1% decrease in total antibiotic consumption was observed in 2012 compared to that observed in 2004. In contrast, a 10.2% and 70.7% increase in broad-spectrum antibiotics and antibiotics against MDR pathogens were observed, respectively, in the same period. The resistance rate of Escherichia coli to 3rd CEPs (17.6% in 2004, 21.7% in 2008, and 33.8% in 2012, P?<.001) and ciprofloxacin (37.5% in 2004, 38.7% in 2008, and 46.6% in 2012, P?=?.001) demonstrated a significantly increasing trend. Similarly, the resistance rate of Klebsiella pneumoniae to 3rd CEPs (34.3% in 2004, 33.7% in 2008, and 44.5% in 2012, P?<.001) gradually increased. Resistance of Acinetobacter baumanii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to imipenem significantly increased throughout the study period (A baumanii: 8.9% in 2004, 40.8% in 2008, and 65.3% in 2012, P?<.001; P aeruginosa: 25.1% in 2004, 31.5% in 2008, and 29.7% in 2008, P?=?.050).The consumption of carbapenems and FQs demonstrated significant positive correlation for resistance of E coli or K pneumoniae to 3rd CEPs as well as E coli or K pneumoniae to ciprofloxacin. Increasing resistance of A baumanii to ciprofloxacin was significantly correlated with increasing consumption of FQs; increasing resistance of A baumanii to imipenem was significantly correlated with increasing consumption of carbapenems.In conclusion, overall antimicrobial resistance increased and consumption of broad-spectrum antibiotics and antibiotics against MDR pathogens subsequently increased in Korean hospitals.

Project description:Coronary artery disease (CAD), the most common manifestation of cardiovascular disease, remains the most common cause of mortality in the United States. Risk assessment is key for primary prevention of coronary events and coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring using computed tomography (CT) is one such non-invasive tool. Despite the proven clinical value of CAC, the current clinical practice implementation for CAC has limitations such as the lack of insurance coverage for the test, need for capital-intensive CT machines, specialized imaging protocols, and accredited 3D imaging labs for analysis (including personnel and software). Perhaps the greatest gap is the millions of patients who undergo routine chest CT exams and demonstrate coronary artery calcification, but their presence is not often reported or quantitation is not feasible. We present two deep learning models that automate CAC scoring demonstrating advantages in automated scoring for both dedicated gated coronary CT exams and routine non-gated chest CTs performed for other reasons to allow opportunistic screening. First, we trained a gated coronary CT model for CAC scoring that showed near perfect agreement (mean difference in scores = -2.86; Cohen's Kappa = 0.89, P < 0.0001) with current conventional manual scoring on a retrospective dataset of 79 patients and was found to perform the task faster (average time for automated CAC scoring using a graphics processing unit (GPU) was 3.5 ± 2.1 s vs. 261 s for manual scoring) in a prospective trial of 55 patients with little difference in scores compared to three technologists (mean difference in scores = 3.24, 5.12, and 5.48, respectively). Then using CAC scores from paired gated coronary CT as a reference standard, we trained a deep learning model on our internal data and a cohort from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) study (total training n = 341, Stanford test n = 42, MESA test n = 46) to perform CAC scoring on routine non-gated chest CT exams with validation on external datasets (total n = 303) obtained from four geographically disparate health systems. On identifying patients with any CAC (i.e., CAC ≥ 1), sensitivity and PPV was high across all datasets (ranges: 80-100% and 87-100%, respectively). For CAC ≥ 100 on routine non-gated chest CTs, which is the latest recommended threshold to initiate statin therapy, our model showed sensitivities of 71-94% and positive predictive values in the range of 88-100% across all the sites. Adoption of this model could allow more patients to be screened with CAC scoring, potentially allowing opportunistic early preventive interventions.

Project description:Background Opioid misuse screening in hospitals is resource-intensive and rarely done. Many hospitalized patients are never offered opioid treatment. An automated approach leveraging routinely captured electronic health record (EHR) data may be easier for hospitals to institute. We previously derived and internally validated an opioid classifier in a separate hospital setting. The aim is to externally validate our previously published and open-source machine-learning classifier at a different hospital for identifying cases of opioid misuse. Methods An observational cohort of 56,227 adult hospitalizations was examined between October 2017 and December 2019 during a hospital-wide substance use screening program with manual screening. Manually completed Drug Abuse Screening Test served as the reference standard to validate a convolutional neural network (CNN) classifier with coded word embedding features from the clinical notes of the EHR. The opioid classifier utilized all notes in the EHR and sensitivity analysis was also performed on the first 24 h of notes. Calibration was performed to account for the lower prevalence than in the original cohort. Results Manual screening for substance misuse was completed in 67.8% (n?=?56,227) with 1.1% (n?=?628) identified with opioid misuse. The data for external validation included 2,482,900 notes with 67,969 unique clinical concept features. The opioid classifier had an AUC of 0.99 (95% CI 0.99–0.99) across the encounter and 0.98 (95% CI 0.98–0.99) using only the first 24 h of notes. In the calibrated classifier, the sensitivity and positive predictive value were 0.81 (95% CI 0.77–0.84) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.68–0.75). For the first 24 h, they were 0.75 (95% CI 0.71–0.78) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.57–0.64). Conclusions Our opioid misuse classifier had good discrimination during external validation. Our model may provide a comprehensive and automated approach to opioid misuse identification that augments current workflows and overcomes manual screening barriers. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-021-00229-7.

Project description:AbstractAs severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 continues to spread, easy-to-use risk models that predict hospital mortality can assist in clinical decision making and triage. We aimed to develop a risk score model for in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) that was robust across hospitals and used clinical factors that are readily available and measured standardly across hospitals.In this retrospective observational study, we developed a risk score model using data collected by trained abstractors for patients in 20 diverse hospitals across the state of Michigan (Mi-COVID19) who were discharged between March 5, 2020 and August 14, 2020. Patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 during hospitalization or were discharged with an ICD-10 code for COVID-19 (U07.1) were included. We employed an iterative forward selection approach to consider the inclusion of 145 potential risk factors available at hospital presentation. Model performance was externally validated with patients from 19 hospitals in the Mi-COVID19 registry not used in model development. We shared the model in an easy-to-use online application that allows the user to predict in-hospital mortality risk for a patient if they have any subset of the variables in the final model.Two thousand one hundred and ninety-three patients in the Mi-COVID19 registry met our inclusion criteria. The derivation and validation sets ultimately included 1690 and 398 patients, respectively, with mortality rates of 19.6% and 18.6%, respectively. The average age of participants in the study after exclusions was 64 years old, and the participants were 48% female, 49% Black, and 87% non-Hispanic. Our final model includes the patient's age, first recorded respiratory rate, first recorded pulse oximetry, highest creatinine level on day of presentation, and hospital's COVID-19 mortality rate. No other factors showed sufficient incremental model improvement to warrant inclusion. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for the derivation and validation sets were .796 (95% confidence interval, .767-.826) and .829 (95% confidence interval, .782-.876) respectively.We conclude that the risk of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients can be reliably estimated using a few factors, which are standardly measured and available to physicians very early in a hospital encounter.